Week one yes rule

Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #39101
    gardnjam
    Participant

    Hi all,

    I’ve received a claim where the claimant in receipt of Income Support, and has been for some time. She has just obtained a council tenancy and became liable to pay rent from 05/09/11; however, she actually moved in on 02/09/11 (the previous benefit) week. On this basis it would appear that the week one yes rule would not apply, yet I do seem to recall (perhaps incorrectly!) that we can nevertheless pay benefit from the start of the rental liability. I can’t seem to find any regs to back this up. Any assistance would be appreciated.

    Thanks

    #110849
    Anonymous
    Guest

    In this case you can do it, because the commencement of liability falls in a week when the dwelling is occupied. The same principle would apply where a non-dep succeeds to a tenancy and so becomes liable for the first time to pay rent for a dwelling they already occupy.

    It’s only a problem when they don’t occupy until a later week than the one in which the liability begins.

    #110850
    Kevin D
    Participant

    If the clmt was on HB at her previous address (with the same LA), there should be no problem – HB is payable as it’s just a change in circs.

    If not previously on HB, still no problem – HB is payable from the start of the tenancy courtesy of the advance claim provisions. In essence, the claim can be legitimately be treated as made on the first day that the basic conditions of entitlement are met (i.e. occupancy AND liability). Even if your LA doesn’t agree with that analysis, are you really going to refuse a backdate in these circumstances?

    In fairness, the legislation itself is less than clear in these circumstances but I can’t for the life of me see any Tribunal supporting a “missed week” in the case outlined.

    NB: A breakdown of the advance claim provision was considered in [b]R(H ) 9/07[/b]. BUT, be careful about drawing direct comparisons – the facts were reversed to your case (i.e. occupancy was in a week AFTER liability had commenced).

    #110852
    gardnjam
    Participant

    Hi,

    The claim form was received on 05/09/11 with no prior date of contact.

    She was from outside of our area.

    Thanks

    #110856
    Anonymous
    Guest

    If she is on Income Support she is still within the month allowed now, but no panic, she applied on the date she became liable anyway so definitely a W1 yes case.

    #110855
    Anonymous
    Guest

    HB Reg 76 (2), also check out shack guide 2010-11 pg 72 5.49

    If they move in before or during the week liability commences we can pay week one yes.

    (& date of claim falls in the liability week – or can be treated as!)

    #110857
    gardnjam
    Participant

    Thanks for the help. It appears that the 2010/11 guide has added the phrase “or before that week”.

    #110851
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    [quote=Kevin D]HB is payable from the start of the tenancy courtesy of the advance claim provisions.[/quote]

    The original poster hasn’t actually said when the claim was made. Presumably – at least how i read the original post – the claim was made on or after 05/09/11, in which case how can advance rules apply?

    Does the housing department issue claim forms as part of its sign up procedure? If so, you could get a date of claim from that for the previous week just to be sure? In principle however, i think week-one-yes is satisfied.

    #111137
    Anonymous
    Guest

    I don’t know why I’m struggling so much with this today but here goes:

    Receipt date 29/07/10, claimant on IS, tenancy & ctax start 18/07/10 (joint tenancy – other tenant moves in on 18/07/10)claimant moves in 25/07/10 no prior HB/CTB claim.

    I think we should’ve paid HB from 26/07/10 Monday following move in date, assessor has paid from Sunday 25/07/10.

    Possible argument for CTB to be paid from the sunday as I think ctax account should been 1st tenant from 18/07/10 – 24/07/10 then both tenants from 25/07/10 so could then allow FWKY for CTB. Account however has been set up in both names from 18/07/10 & no discount applied for 18/07/10 – 24/07/10.

    The boomtown rats were so right….. :tired:

    Any help appreciated.

    #111143
    Kevin D
    Participant

    I agree that HB is only payable from 26 Jul 2010 – HBR 76(2) isn’t engaged and in any event case law confirms 26 Jul to be correct (“Robinson” and R(H ) 9/07).

    For CTB, the normal “occupancy” rules are thrown out of the window. If CTAX have billed a clmt (whether or not as a joint charge payer) as a resident from date “X”, CTB cannot be paid for any date of absence UNLESS the absence is a “period of temporary absence” as defined in CTBR 8(3).

    In my view, based on the info given so far, the clmt’s absence is not a “period of temporary absence” because that provision relies on there being an intention to return which (amongst other things), in turn, implies there must have been residence prior to the absence.

    Therefore, the first day of occupancy and, potentially, CTB entitlement is also 26 July 2010 (no week one Y). If CTAX change (correct?) the charge to include your client only from 25 July, I would agree CTB should start from then.

    #111145
    Andy Thurman
    Keymaster

    Hi Kate, Agree with Kevin although I’d assert more strongly that ctax position is incorrect & should be amended allowing 25.7 as 1st date liable. UNLESS (!), your claimant’s declarations etc. have been taken out of context?!?
    Is the ‘move in’ date of 25.7 an ‘absolute fact’? Ctax seem convinced she moved in on 18.7! Has claimant stated moving in on 25.7 as the date she considered it to be a “permanent thing” having severed all ties with wherever she lived previously? And if the joint tenant is a partner….?

    #111149
    Anonymous
    Guest

    I have checked all the correspondence from the claimant which all states she moved in 25/07/10, she has since moved out of area so I cannot check this. The LL stated after she moved out that she had lived there since 18/07/10 but then again he is probably just stating the tenancy start date, the other tenant stated she moved in 18/07/10.

    I was only looking at the case as it has recorded 25/07/10 as backdating as no FWKY ticked. I don’t think that it is the case as thankfully you have both confirmed. I’m not going crazy after all…

    I will have to assume 25th July is the date she moved as stated, the date was not questioned at the time. I will arrange for HB to be cancelled out for that day & written off as LA error, I will ask council tax about amending (correcting!!) the account, whether they will or not is another question altogether!

    Thanks for your help both

    Hometime! 🙂

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.